Has anyone been using this to log there SOTA contacts?
Thanks Karl
2W0CSS
In reply to M6CSS:
No!
In reply to M6CSS:
Hi Karl,
I already wondered what the benefit of this qrz.com add-on could be! To answer your question: No, and I don’t think I’ll be going to use it in the future. I am already uploading to LotW, clublog.org and eQSL and neither have got time nor desire to administrate a fourth online-log. Unfortunately there seems to be no option to switch it off.
just my 2ct
73 Bernhard DL4CW
In reply to DL4CW:
It can be switched off via the user control panel, accessible through the forum section of QRZ.
In reply to KI6J:
tnx!
In reply to DL4CW:
Actually after looking at how long it would take to add in the amount of contacts my activations usually generate I don’t know whether I could be bothered. Although I will add my chaser contacts from now on.
Apparently an option to upload ADIF is coming soon, but that’s only if you pay them some extra money.
Thanks Karl
In reply to M6CSS:
Hi Karl, I think the problem with QRZ log book is there are already too many diverse on-line logging systems (eQSL and Logbook of the World to name two) and to get full functionality you have to pay and we know how frugal us radio amateurs can be. It seems like a good idea but when the people who want to log on-line are buying into one system why would they want to buy in to yet another one as well? especially with the added hassle of up-loading the data to yet another system. I think if the fully functional system was free the take up would be much higher and the others would suffer as everyone deserted them. At least with eQSL there is a free option (although they want you to make a donation).
Regards Steve GW7AAV
In reply to GW7AAV, M6CSS etc.:
Hi,
I too was wondering what on earth the ‘log’ function of QRZ was supposed to do! I upload my home station logs monthly to both eQSL and LoTW but I’m rapidly becoming disenchanted with eQSL, as it does not seem to have good coverage of amateurs worldwide. From the same basic data I have 136 countries verified on LoTW and only 90 on eQSL (for my electronic logging which I started in 1997/8)
My activator logs are all manually entered into the SOTA database as are my chaser logs and that seems adequate for me. When the odd QSL pops up for an activation I have no trouble finding the QSO and confirming it.
The disadvantage of both eQSL and QRZ logs is you can verify contacts where one party did not get both calls correct. LoTW only confirms contacts when both parties have entered the correct data, which seems to me to be more honest. I have had several eQSLs that were not in my log and many turned out to be poor copying of callsigns by one end of the contact.
If anyone needs a QSL or eQSL from me for any of my activations, please contact me via the reflector, direct or buro and I will respond ASAP
73 to all
Mike G4DDL
In reply to G4DDL:
To my mind the logging function on QRZ is totally superfluous. There are already two systems in eQSL and LOTW that 95% of the amateur population ignore (myself included), so why do we need another? I now only QSL by return and even QSLs received direct have to wait for when I can find the time (and enthusiasm) to respond.
Okay so I’m a Luddite when it comes to logging and QSLing, but in this hectic life putting my logs online is something I can well do without. I adopt the KISS principle when it comes to logging and never use a computer logging program in real time. Surely the QSO and the enjoyment of making contact is the important factor. When there’s more time for that, there’s more enjoyment. Perhaps we need to get back to basics… simples!
73, Gerald
licensed since 1969…
In reply to G4OIG:
Surely the QSO and the
enjoyment of making contact is the important factor. When there’s more
time for that, there’s more enjoyment. Perhaps we need to get back to
basics… simples!
Exactly. My hobby is radio not collecting postcards. Stopping people wasting their time and money sending me QSL cards is one reason why I’ve had my details removed from QRZ and the like.
Andy
MM0FMF